The Washington Post: The Answer Sheet
...Meanwhile, report cards for young kids now don’t look like report cards for young kids. In Montgomery County Public Schools in Maryland, kindergarteners get marked in the following subjects twice a year...[see report card shown below]
The grading goes like this:
P — Meets the grade-level standard by demonstrating proficiency of the content or processes for the Measurement Topic
I — In progress toward meeting the grade-level standard
N — Not yet making progress or making minimal progress toward meeting the grade-level standard
M — Missing data – no score recorded
NEP — Not English Proficient; may be used for a level 1 or 2 ESOL student for no more than two marking periods
Surely the people who put this together were well-meaning.
But well-meaning doesn’t make it right, or fair, or sensible.
Thanks! The link has been corrected.
ReplyDeletePTA is now having a problem with the new MCPS grading system. PTA is at the "table", why isn't their voice being heard?
ReplyDeleteMCCPTA Proposed Resolution on Grading and Reporting
Measuring Mastery of the Elementary Curriculum 2.0
Whereas,
MCPS rolled out the Standards-Based Report card, aligned with Curriculum 2.0, to all schools in Grades K-3 in 2012-13 following a six year pilot field test program, beginning with the 2006-07 school year;
Whereas,
the MCPS Department of Shared Accountability recommended in a February 2008 Evaluation Brief that teacher comments be added to the revised report card and/ or opportunities be created for more face-to-face contact between teacher and parent.
Whereas,
since the 2006-07 school year, parents’ feedback has consistently expressed that teacher comments are a valuable tool in understanding their child’s students’ progress in school. In addition, most school districts in the U.S. that are implementing standards based report cards continue to include teacher comments.
Whereas,
Parents have expressed confusion over the new grading rubric (ES, P, I, N) and have complained that it provides little information on most students’ degree of mastery of curriculum standards because the large majority of students are graded “proficient” without any additional nuance. In addition, parents are confused about how their child is being graded if they are when performing above grade level tasks.
Now be it;
Resolved,
MCCPTA emphatically requests that MCCPTA requests that MCPS reinstate individualized teacher comments and opportunities to have face-to-face parent/ teacher conferences after the first quarter.
Resolved,
MCCPTA emphatically requests that that MCCPTA requests that MCPS revise the grading system to expand the range of options to describe each student’s level of mastery in each standard. Specifically, each standard should include sufficient opportunities to demonstrate achievement of an ES-level mark achievement so that a student can potentially earn an overall "ES" grade for the marking period.
Resolved,
MCCPTA emphatically requests that that MCCPTA requests that MCPS simplify the language on the report card, clarify the meaning of the grade (including grades that reflect above grade level work) and provide clear information on how an assessed grade is determined.
Also, the resolution mentions an evaluation brief and I had trouble finding the link last month but I have since found it on the MCPS website, so here is some additional supporting documentation:
http://montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/sharedaccountability/reports/2008/Elementary_parent_survey_brief_Feb_28_2008.pdf